Quick comparison
| Tool / option | Starting price | ~25-client cost | Methodology | Approaches | Audit support |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WageProof | $199 / report | $999/yr | Published (BLS OEWS) | All three; Income at every pro tier | Standard support |
| RCReports | $499 / report | $2,500/yr | Proprietary (sources confidential) | All three (see RCReports pricing) | Included in all plans |
| Paychex (bundled w/ payroll) | Bundled | Bundled | Not fully published | Verify with Paychex | Standard Paychex support |
| BLS OEWS manual lookup (DIY) | Free | Free | Public (BLS) | Cost / Market only | None |
| Industry surveys (DIY) | Free–$$ | Varies | Published, narrow scope | Market only | None |
WageProof
Starting price$199 / report~25-client cost$999/yrMethodologyPublished (BLS OEWS)ApproachesAll three; Income at every pro tierAudit supportStandard supportRCReports
Starting price$499 / report~25-client cost$2,500/yrMethodologyProprietary (sources confidential)ApproachesAll three (see RCReports pricing)Audit supportIncluded in all plansPaychex (bundled w/ payroll)
Starting priceBundled~25-client costBundledMethodologyNot fully publishedApproachesVerify with PaychexAudit supportStandard Paychex supportBLS OEWS manual lookup (DIY)
Starting priceFree~25-client costFreeMethodologyPublic (BLS)ApproachesCost / Market onlyAudit supportNoneIndustry surveys (DIY)
Starting priceFree–$$~25-client costVariesMethodologyPublished, narrow scopeApproachesMarket onlyAudit supportNone
The cheapest paid option that still produces a fully-cited, defensible PDF. Generate one for $199— no annual commitment.
Start your first reportWhat to look for in an RCReports alternative
Five criteria that actually matter:
- 1Methodology transparency. Can you show an IRS examiner exactly where the wage data came from? Federal sources (BLS OEWS) are line-by-line verifiable. Proprietary methodologies provide a confidence-tested result; courts and the IRS have accepted both approaches in practice.
- 2All three IRS-recognized approaches. The IRS Reasonable Compensation Job Aid recognizes the Cost Approach, Market Approach, and Income Approach (Independent Investor Test).
- 3Per-report cost at your volume.Map your actual report volume to the vendor’s tier structure and divide annual cost by reports — that’s your real per-report cost.
- 4Professional workflow. Client management, shareable questionnaires, white-label PDFs, year-over-year duplication. The report is a deliverable, but the workflow is what scales.
- 5Audit support posture. Does customer support answer methodology questions during an audit? Is there a paid premium service available? Is there a published court track record?
Software alternatives
WageProof
Best for transparent methodology and professional volume pricing
Disclosure:WageProof publishes this comparison. Every tool here — including ours — is scored on the same five criteria, and RCReports pricing is cited from rcreports.com (verified June 26, 2026).
WageProof generates reasonable compensation reports across the three IRS-recognized approaches (Cost, Market, Income / Independent Investor Test), one approach per report. The Cost and Market approaches draw on BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage data; the Income approach applies the Independent Investor Test to the company’s own financials. The methodology — including the seven-level geographic fallback chain, ECI-based inflation adjustment, and proficiency-to-percentile mapping — is published at /methodology. Every BLS wage figure traces to a specific SOC code and percentile, with the geography and BLS data year stated at the document level.
Pricing
- Single report (owner): $199 (Cost + Market approaches)
- Single report (Pro Pay-Per): $199 (any of the three approaches)
- Starter: $499/year (10 reports included)
- Professional: $999/year (30 reports included) — includes white-label
- Firm: $1,499/year (60 reports included) — includes white-label
Pros
- Lowest per-report cost of the paid tools compared here at typical volumes (one report per client/year)
- Full methodology published; every BLS wage figure (Cost & Market approaches) traces line-by-line to a SOC code and percentile
- All three IRS approaches included at every pro plan level
- White-label PDFs starting at $999/year (Professional)
- $199 Pay-Per-Report tier with no annual commitment
- Standard customer support answers methodology questions during audits
Cons
- Newer to market (launched 2025); methodology has not yet been cited in published court cases
- No paid premium audit-support service (methodology questions answered as part of standard support)
- Single-user accounts only; no multi-seat firm accounts
- No CPE/CE training programs
- No standalone wage lookup or entity planning tools
Best for
Firms generating 5+ reasonable comp reports per year that want lower per-report cost without trading away IRS defensibility. Also S-corp owners generating their own report who don't want to pay $499 for a one-off.
RCReports
Best for an established platform with per-client pricing
The established platform in the category. RCReports has been in market for over a decade, and per rcreports.com states its methodology has been relied upon in IRS examinations and litigation. The platform supports all three IRS approaches and offers adjacent tools (Entity Planning Tool, standalone Wage Lookup, Batch Send, a CYA Log) at upper tiers. It is priced per client, not per report. The trade-off is price.
Pricing
- For owners: $499 single report (one-time)
- Premium: $1,500/year (up to 10 clients, 1 user)
- Professional (25 clients): $2,500/year (up to 25 clients, 2 users) — adds Entity Planning Tool, Wage Lookup, Batch Send, CYA Log
- Professional (50 clients): $4,800/year (up to 50 clients, 3 users)
- Professional (100 clients): $7,500/year (up to 100 clients, 4 users)
- Enterprise: Custom (API access, dedicated account manager)
- Audit & litigation support: Included in all plans
Pros
- Long market history; methodology relied upon in IRS examinations and litigation (per RCReports)
- Audit & litigation support included in all plans
- Per-client pricing — no extra charge for multiple reports on the same client
- Multi-user firm accounts (2–4 users on Professional plans)
- Entity Planning Tool, standalone Wage Lookup, Batch Send, CYA Log
- CPE/CE training via RCReports University
Cons
- Highest cost in this comparison (~$100/report at the 25-client tier vs ~$40 on WageProof, at one report per client)
- Underlying data sources and calculations are confidential (per RCReports); not verifiable line-by-line the way BLS data is
- Priced per client, so low-volume firms pay for capacity they may not use
- Income Approach availability per tier — see RCReports' pricing page for current details
Best for
Firms that want an established platform, per-client pricing with multiple reports per client, multi-user accounts, RCReports' adjacent tools (Entity Planning, Wage Lookup), or CPE through RCReports University; firms whose audit-defense posture relies on a methodology with a longer reliance history.
Paychex Reasonable Compensation Analysis
Best if you already use Paychex payroll
Paychex appears to bundle a reasonable compensation analysis with certain payroll tiers. It’s not a standalone product, and the methodology details aren’t fully published, but for firms or owners already paying Paychex for payroll it may be a low-friction option — confirm current availability and tier with Paychex.
Pricing
- Pricing: Reportedly bundled with higher Paychex Flex payroll tiers; quoted, not published — confirm the current tier with Paychex
Pros
- Potentially no extra cost if a reasonable-comp analysis is included in your Paychex payroll tier (confirm with Paychex)
- Tied to a major payroll vendor with an established compliance posture
- Payroll data may flow directly into the analysis if you already use Paychex
Cons
- Methodology details are not fully publicly published — verify with Paychex what approaches are included before relying on it
- Based on publicly available product descriptions, the deliverable appears to be a comparable-wage analysis rather than a multi-approach decomposition; confirm with Paychex
- Locked in if you ever leave Paychex payroll
Best for
Existing Paychex Flex Select+ payroll customers who want a basic reasonable comp number for tax filing as part of an existing relationship. Verify the methodology, approach coverage, and report deliverable with Paychex before relying on it for audit-relevant analysis.
Non-tool options
These aren’t software products — they’re DIY paths. Included because they’re real-world options that some S-corp owners and tax pros do use, but listed separately so the comparison stays honest.
DIY: BLS OEWS Lookup + Spreadsheet
FreeThe IRS Job Aid points to BLS OEWS data among its comparable wage sources. A DIY approach uses bls.gov/oes directly, looks up SOC codes, and computes the Cost or Market Approach in a spreadsheet.
Pros
- Free — uses the same federal data WageProof uses
- Full control over methodology and data choices
- Educational — forces you to understand the calculation
Cons
- Time-consuming: SOC search, MSA lookup, percentile selection, ECI inflation adjustment, fallback for missing geographies
- No PDF report — you produce the documentation yourself
- High error risk — one bad SOC match can produce a wildly off number
- No version control or audit trail
- Doesn't include the standard IRS Job Aid framing, methodology narrative, or sample salary resolution language
Best for
Technically inclined S-corp owners doing a one-off calculation who are comfortable building their own documentation, and who treat the result as a directional estimate rather than an audit-ready report.
Industry compensation surveys (Robert Half, Salary.com, Payscale)
Free–$$Salary databases like Robert Half’s annual Salary Guide, Salary.com’s Personal Salary Report, and Payscale’s compensation reports can serve as one of multiple comparables in a Market Approach analysis.
Pros
- Industry-specific compensation data often more granular than BLS by sub-specialty
- Free or cheap at the personal-report level
- Useful supplement to BLS data — multiple sources strengthen a Market Approach
Cons
- Methodology and sample sizes are vendor-controlled and not always published
- Single approach only (Market) — no Cost or Income decomposition
- No audit-ready report deliverable; you build the documentation yourself
- Geography sometimes coarser than BLS MSA-level data
- Not generally accepted as a primary IRS comparable on their own
Best for
Supplementing a primary BLS-based analysis with industry-specific data, or for owners in specialized roles where BLS occupation codes don't capture the work cleanly.
How to choose
Common questions
Three software products: WageProof (newer, BLS-published methodology, lower per-report cost), RCReports itself (the established platform), and Paychex's bundled reasonable compensation analysis if you already use Paychex payroll. Plus two non-tool options: DIY BLS OEWS lookup with a spreadsheet, and industry compensation surveys (Robert Half, Salary.com, Payscale) used as Market Approach supplements.
Five criteria: (1) methodology transparency — can you show an IRS examiner where the wage data came from, (2) coverage of all three IRS-recognized approaches (Cost, Market, Income), (3) per-report cost at your actual report volume, (4) professional workflow features such as client management, white-label, year-over-year duplication, and (5) audit support posture — standard customer support, paid premium services, or court track record.
Yes. BLS OEWS manual lookup is free if you have the time and technical comfort to build documentation yourself. Industry surveys are partially free. Neither produces an audit-ready PDF the way a software tool does. WageProof at $199 per report is the lowest paid option that produces a fully cited, defensible PDF deliverable.
No tool offers a direct data import between vendors. Client name, business type, hours, geography, and proficiency level are inputs you re-enter manually — but the data is data you have already collected, so new-tool entry typically takes 5 to 10 minutes per client.
Possibly. Different tools use different wage data sources, geographic granularity, and proficiency-to-percentile mappings. Different tools can produce different numbers, all of which can be defensible if the methodology is documented and the data source is credible. Running one client through both is the cleanest comparison.
Yes. Reports are year-specific deliverables. Your archive of prior PDFs from one tool remains valid for those years; you do not need to re-run them. Going forward, generate in whichever tool you have chosen.
Yes. None of the tools lock you in long-term beyond the annual subscription. Most tax pros trial-run one client on a new tool before committing, then make a decision quarter by quarter.